• MrShankles@reddthat.com
    78·
    1 day ago

    It’s not? Being informed is always positive, and it’s always unfortunate that bias exists. I’d rather learn and try to understand my own bias, as opposed to being ignorant and having bias anyway

    Do you have a tool that is just as accessible as wiki, but perfectly objective? Or are you throwing the baby out with the bath-water? Knowledge is good for any culture, and bias is a motherfucker to us all. Your critique isn’t unwarranted, but it does flirt with anti-intellectualism

    • BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml
      6·
      16 hours ago

      “Being informed is positive” is not what is being argued against, and you know it. This is disingenuous and poor rhetorics.

      Do you have a tool that is just as accessible as wiki, but perfectly objective? Or are you throwing the baby out with the bath-water?

      More poor rhetorics. If youre not interested in actual discussion, why engage with someone acting in clear, good faith? Its pretty clear that the argument is that the issue with Wikipedia is that it presents itself as unbiased, while in fact being heavily biased. The issue is not the presence of bias itself.

    • 1Malayali@lemmy.mlOPEnglish
      14·
      1 day ago

      Being informed of the bias is also positive

      No one mentioned anything about throwing the bathwater, but only hinted at the bias.

      Are you trying to villainise and portray it as anti-intellectualism?
      Are you thinking that the source you use is unbiased and trying to derial convos that hint at how it is not unbiased?

      Noting the bias is a good thing and trying to shut down the convoys on that is a bigger mf to all of us.

      Your concerns isn’t unwarranted, but it does flirt with strawmanning and derailing the convo.